The Pyramids are older than 2600 B.C.

and do not forget, the sphynx was BURIED for a good portion of that time. this would actually preserve the statue. to have eroded tis much, this
monument needs to have been exposed to the elements for a longer period of time.

Enh, I think I misrepresented myself with some lazy cut-and-paste. You selected probably the only quote in that whole block of text that would support
mainstream Egyptological theories-which I think are bunk.

Actually there's something kind of weird about that. Herodotus wrote that the Great Pyramid was "built of polished stone, and is covered with
carvings of animals." Carvings of animals=probably hieroglyphics. Unfortunately, as is the fate of many ancient structures near newer cities, over
time the Great Pyramid was heavily cannibalized, and many of those hieroglyphics have probably been incorporated into the older buildings of the city
of Cairo.

2. The people who built the pyramid did not use hieroglyphs. The Egyptians played no major role in the pyramid's construction except to embellish it
later on.

Im inclined to believe this one. But I could be wrong. No one alive now was there and time travel is still a impossiblity.

I don't go as far as some as some out there (WAY out there IMHO) and say "We been here the whole time." (IE sorry I don't think we could have
lived with dinosaurs) but I do believe the current accepted timeline for humanity is wrong in that its too short.

Earlier pyramids don't have hieroglyphs either
later ones do which spell out spells to protect the dead Pharoah in the afterlife and are known as the pyramid texts, they later evolved into the
coffin texts and the Egyptian book of the dead
the earliest examples of these are found in the pyramid of Unas 2375 BC and 2345 BC the last king of the fifth dynasty. Thats about 200 years after
the Gizamids were built. they weren't written in any earlier monument of any kind because they were invented during the fifth dynasty, not the fourth
which created the Gizamids or the third which built the first pyramids. They were only used by the fifth and sixth dynasties. So there is a perfectly
valid reason why there are no Hieroglyphs inside. en.wikipedia.org...

Is someone actually trying to claim here that the super advanced Gizamids don't have hieroglyphs because they were built by an illiterate race ?

thats a bit bizzarre seeing as even the quarry teams were writing on the blocks

Enh, I think I misrepresented myself with some lazy cut-and-paste. You selected probably the only quote in that whole block of text that would support
mainstream Egyptological theories-which I think are bunk.

Don't read too much into my choice of quote where you state the alleged age of the Giza monuments. I didn't see the point of quoting huge chunks of
text.

I agree with you about mainstream Egyptological theories. No issue there, my friend.

That and the sphinx's head is too small in proportion to the body for a sphinx.

One theory is that if The Sphinx is in fact >10,000 years old, and the evidence that it may indeed be this age is fairly strong, it was originally a
lion complete with head.

The face it has now is believed to be that of Cheops. Cheops had the lion-head re-fashioned and re-carved to represent himself. This explains why the
head is too small and looks a bit odd, like it doesn't belong with the body.

This re-fashioning job would have been done about 5,000 years after the original lion was carved.

(forgive the 'proportion' edit to your quote but you already admitted to noticing the typo)

You appear to not have anything really to say but I have made a few comments.

None. Thats why I opened this thread. To gather such evidence, should it even exist. My suspicions arose in conversations with egyptologists who tell
me something different than they publicly state.

Hans: Oh my, the old, “ I was told all the secrets by a secret person” dodge– sorry guy completely unreliable and unbelievable. So other than
your tuition and a made up story of you (I’ve been involved in the world of Archaeology for 35+ years) being told all the secrets - you actually
don't have any evidence?

I am not saying that the Pyramids were built by "The Gods" or aliens, if thats what you are hinting at here. But that raises the question: What DID
the Egyptians say about who built them?

Hans: The workers at the workers village seem to think they and their children did but they were obviously delusional

You are saying there is documentation on how the pyramids were built?

Hans: You keep asking that same question, you know the answer. Do you have any proof or evidence of it being built before 2600 BC? Anything at all?

I dont know. Neither does it tell us anything about the age.

Hans: Incorrect it tells us the Egyptian built a tomb for x, y, and z and associated mortuary temples. From other sources we can approximate when that
person lived. We can then verify by carbon dating the approximate build date. In case you were not aware reusing a tomb was considered poor taste -
especially for a Pharoah - hey why did your fictional advanced civilization build a tomb inside a pyramid? As a matter of fact why is it they only
built three things on this planet?

They were wiped out or they left, or, should they be extraterrestrial, they never settled on earth.

Hans: Sorry an unacceptable answer, may I kindly suggest you go read a basic book on archaeology and find out what traces humans leave behind? I feel
I'm trying to show a book to someone who is illiterate. As I stated before there is no evidence of anyone except the Egyptians on the Giza plateau or
the Nile Valley. So who built them if not the Egyptians – we awaiting your evidence.

Hans: Support? Tools? The Egyptians hammered out limestone blocks using levers and stone hand hammers – not very advanced tools eh? So evidence of
this support you suggest?

WHY ARE THE OLDER PYRAMIDS MORE ADVANCED THAN NEWER ONES.

Hans: They aren’t, again read a basic book about the pyramids , I’d recommend Lehner’s “The complete pyramids".

If you don’t have any evidence of an earlier construction date for the pyramids – why are you wasting our time?

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
And we don't use hieroglyphs, are we illiterate?
The Sumerians didn't use hieroglyphs, were they? (used cuniform)

you asked a question and you got a perfectly reasonable explanation, the Egyptians were using Hieroglyphs from 500 years before the Gizamids were
built, they didn't start inscribing pyramids with them until 200 years after the Gizamids were built. You obviously had problems with my answer
because it is backed by the known facts. what do the Sumerians have to do with illiteracy, they didn't build pyramids or inscribe their tombs EVER
and they had cuneiform from 3500bce thats 1000 years before the Gizamids were built

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
Might want to not dig so deeply in any future attempts to make me look like a fool, by digging into the realm of fantasy and only suceeding in making
yourself look like one.

I wasn't digging. I was simply answering your question, there was no ridicule anywhere in my post. You are the only person here who can make
yourself look a fool. Keep up the good work

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
And where in the HECK do you get that I was talking about aliens of any sort? Other than the fantasy you have in your head that is.

at what point did I even mention Aliens in response to your post. Are we both on the same page here ?

Originally posted by Skyfloating
If I want the official version all I have to do is google it up or start at wikipedia.

There is a whole section on wiki devoted to alternate theories under Great Pyramid of Giza.

You will find ALL the different theories if you google it up, not just the "official" version. Most of them are regurgitating the same weak evidence
that originate in unreliable data and/or people that desperately seek advanced civilizations just to prove their are right and everyone else is wrong.

What I am saying is: In the past 3 years on ATS there were actually instances I gained new "insider information" I had not found with google or even
at the alternatives section. I always open threads with the intent to learn something new. If nothing new comes up then I will gladly accept the
"official version".

The thing with "alternative theories" is that I personally know and respect some of the people promoting them and am not entirely ready to label
them as frauds or lunatics.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.